Short-body. Canon have only ever used tall-bodies for 1D-series for PRO's to accommodate larger battery pack + additional buttons for vertical shooting. The 3D will be first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera

Hmmm, "...first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera." That sounds a lot like how Canon has described the 1Ds line. After all, 's' = 'studio', right?

Still, unless this is called a 1D Xs, I expect anything other than a 1-series will not have an integrated grip.

This might be partially my own wishful thinking. But if this is going to be a splash (as described in the original article), then I think (and hope) it's a proper 1Ds replacement. It could be a new format sensor. Perhaps that 30x45 size or something encroaching on medium format.

Personally, I think there are enough sub-1DX full frame cameras in the lineup already (5D3, 5D2, 6D). If Canon is going to innovate and "make a splash" I expect a 1Ds replacement...which means it'll be somewhere around $10k.

I'm surprised there's no mention of the 1Dc, how much was that "firmware upgrade from 1Dx" going for again?As with 4K being a "special feature" what's stopping Canon from labeling the super resolution as a special feature that excludes itself from all others, and thus deserving of an insane price tag?Then again rumours are rumours, this beast is either pro level, or in the spirit of the original 5D, a large mp FF sensor in a not-so-special-at-all body?

part of me think the 36MP with amazing DR will have to keep the 46MP Canon price in check, WAYYYY in check unless the new Canon also has top DR

but part of me thinks Canon went 46MP 5fps instead of a more all-around useful 38MP 6fps (also with more perfect video reads) because they are oooooo it's a full TEN more MP than the D800 now we can charge whatever, maybe even $7000, maybe even $9000 and will give us a less all-around camera and go MP crazy and dump a higher price and also think they don't need to match DR just because it has 10 more MP now

Instead of focusing on what would make it a more all-around camera, part of the desire for MP is for more reach and when you want reach you often times would want better body response and more fps, once you are to 6fps you can at least live withit, even it it is not ideal. So giving it just a few less MP, which will be harder to spot anyway for landscape prints than frames an extra 1 fps apart difference and crop modes instead of silly sRAW/mRAW would make it a really cool all around camera instead of a specialized studio/landscape cam (at a perhaps higher price and lower sales).

I am not sure any super high resolution camera is ever going to be an "all-rounder". The D800, even at a "low" 36mp, is really not a general purpose camera. It has its niche...effectively the same niche a Canon 46mp camera or a MFD camera has...studio and landscapes. I've never needed more than 1 frame per minute when doing landscape with any camera, so 5fps in a 46mp camera is pretty amazing to me.

As for DR. If we gather up all the rumors so far, this 46.1mp FF camera from Canon could potentially have a thermally cooled sensor for better low-ISO noise (better DR), PLUS full 16-bit per channel color. Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ). At worst, I'd expect them to have similar DR to the D800 with both improvements in place. The real question is whether thermal cooling and full 16-bit are simply wild rumor, or based on some kernel of truth somewhere.

If Nikon can sell the D800 where they are, Canon can sell this camera in the $4k-$5k range.

It's not about what Canon *could* do, but about what brings them their best revenue - and the specs of the 6d shows that Canon is pretty confident to get away with almost everything because people are only talking about switching to Nikon, not actually doing that.

But even if I repeat myself: People, stop buying the 5d3! Wait and save for the 6d or 3d! (then the price of the 5d3 will drop eventually and I can get one :-))

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

Why would you have to drop the LCD? Peltiers can be extremely thin. As for a heat sink, I mentioned a heat pipe cooler on top of the Peltier. With a heat pipe, you could draw heat away from the peltier and dissipate it at multiple locations around the camera body, distributing the heat load and eliminating the possibility of burning the user. you wouldn't even really need a "radiator"...a few heat plates along the outside of the body would probably do. With enough heat distribution, the camera would probably feel only slightly warm to the touch. Active cooling could add noise, but it could also be configured to only turn on if the sensor is particularly hot (such as when being used in the sun.)

I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. I guess Canon got some more tricks up it's sleeve!

This would be an awesome studio camera. I was thinking that if you use the smaller RAW size files, that this camera can double as a really good all-arounder camera. But with the proposed ISO range, it really wouldn't be much better than the 5DMK2 at that point. You'd have to go full megapixel to get all the use out of the camera. Because 5fps is pretty darn good for many people.

I do think 5fps seems pretty fast for all these pixels. That's a huge barrier for the D800. It's speed. I also don't think it will be in a Pro body either. Not that it really matters since a studio/landscape camera will largely be on a tripod.

At first I thought this camera would be around $4k. But now I'm thinking it will start at $5k and eventually drop to $4500. The 5DMK3 will be in the $2700 range by the time this thing comes out and it's a HUGE jump in price. Totally different markets though. Unfortunately I don' t think the 7DMK2 (if it ever comes out) will fit between the 3D and 5D. I got a feeling the 7DMK2 will be the camera the 5DMK3 should've been...

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

Why would you have to drop the LCD? Peltiers can be extremely thin. As for a heat sink, I mentioned a heat pipe cooler on top of the Peltier. With a heat pipe, you could draw heat away from the peltier and dissipate it at multiple locations around the camera body, distributing the heat load and eliminating the possibility of burning the user. you wouldn't even really need a "radiator"...a few heat plates along the outside of the body would probably do. With enough heat distribution, the camera would probably feel only slightly warm to the touch. Active cooling could add noise, but it could also be configured to only turn on if the sensor is particularly hot (such as when being used in the sun.)

Sure it could be thin and I agree, that heat pipe on top might be enough. It's just a matter of average Peltier cooler power consumption as a function of it's cooling demands as a function of desired goal - temperature on a sensor. If you wish to go really low, then you need more power so the more heat dissipation. More than electric power used for Peltier will be necessery to dissipate as a heat. Some good solution could be thermal isolation of the sensor like in vacuum flask. Anyway - if you go really low, then you might be forced to remove the lcd from the back of the body.Peltier cooled sensors are widely used in microscopy and you find there brands well known and often mentioned here. It's interesting who has patent for Peltier cooling of camera sensors?

I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. (...)

I'm against taking away their R&D resources for a new battle front as there is still much to do in the DSLR area. Medium format would require another lenses, new body concept. Starting medium format would almost be for them like EOS Cinema line. Who knows how much negative influence on EF lenses and EOS bodies had research on EOS C product line? Maybe we could have 5d3 and 1 dx more than a year earlier and the promised lenses as well.

If Nikon can sell the D800 where they are, Canon can sell this camera in the $4k-$5k range.

It's not about what Canon *could* do, but about what brings them their best revenue - and the specs of the 6d shows that Canon is pretty confident to get away with almost everything because people are only talking about switching to Nikon, not actually doing that.

But even if I repeat myself: People, stop buying the 5d3! Wait and save for the 6d or 3d! (then the price of the 5d3 will drop eventually and I can get one :-))

Exactly. Canon's BEST revenue for this would be in the $4k-$5k range. Charging higher than the 1DX makes absolutely no sense to either Canon or the consumers. Comparing the 6D to this isn't comparing apples to apples. The 3D or whatever is going to be for professionals and professionals know when something is priced more than double its worth. Canon knows this, and a prime example is the 1Ds Mark III vs. the 1D Mark IV pricing: the cost of making a great DSLR reduced over time, and this was reflected in costs in the future for new DSLR's. Again, $8k-$10k makes absolutely no sense to everyone.

Why compare the 3D to the 5D Mark III? Again, makes absolutely no sense because these cameras do not serve the same interests. I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.